Credit Insurance, Bailout and Systemic Risk Kaushalendra Kishore

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Credit Insurance, Bailout and Systemic Risk Kaushalendra Kishore Discussant: Gautham Udupa CAFRAL and World Bank Conference on \State Intervention in the Financial Sector" February 26-27, 2020 Overview { Very nice paper, legibly written and easy to follow. { A very important question: how do systemic risks build up in the financial system? { Severe build ups can lead to large asset bubble bursts { In a panic, solvent banks can suffer insolvency { Recent example: AIG in 2008 Facts { Key contribution: show a novel channel { Expectation of bailout of a large insurer can lead to ex-ante coordination of bank investments { Given the expectation of bailout, the results are endogenous in the model { Key policy takeaway: { Curtail the size of insurers Anatomy of Systemic Risk Creation Assume: if the insurer is insolvent, banks expect it to be bailed out. In anticipation, { Every bank wants asset that performs poorly when insurer is bailed out =) bank \herding" { Banks insure only against shocks in good time =) under priced insurance contracts { Herding creates aggregate risk When there is an aggregate shock, { Many banks' assets underperform at the same time { Underpriced insurance =) premium does not cover payouts to banks =) insurer progresses towards insolvency { Regulator bails out the insurer, it is the best ex post policy The circle is complete Comments Differences compared to Acharya and Yorulmazer (2007) In AY 2007, regulator is forced to bailout banks. { Source of moral hazard Best ex-post policy: make solvent banks buy insolvent ones. { Regulator can identify solvent and insolvent banks { Increases value (for banks) of staying solvent ex-ante In this paper, insurer's insolvency generates run on all counterparty banks. Regulator can not distinguish between solvent and insolvent banks. Causes of Bank Herding Ex-post insurer bailout This paper Monetary policy Farhi and Tirole (2012) Ex-post bank bailout Acharya and Yorulmazer (2007) Limited liability and cross-bank externalities Acharya (2009), Acharya and Yorulmazer (2008) Reputation concerns Rajan (1994) Comments Some numbers on how important this channel is will be helpful. { Compare with bank bailouts, bank sizes Are bailouts always optimal during fire sales? { Regulators made profits after normal conditions returned? In the spirit of this conference, any comments on how relevant is the paper in the context of India, or broadly in South Asia? AIG Bailout - A Summary of Facts { AIG had insurance and debt contracts across the globe { Over $1 trillion in assets prior to crisis { Written CDSs on over $500 billion worth of assets ($78 billions of CDOs) { CDSs a major player in the collapse; $30 billion losses due to CDSs { Second major contributor was securities lending causing $21 billion in losses { Sep-Dec 2008: Federal Reserve assisted with over $100 billion in loans and liquidity Catch: Loan was paid back in full in 2013; Fed made a nominal profit of $23 billion with stock sales. Sources: McDonal and Paulson (JEP 2014): \AIG in Hindsight" Back.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

From the American Dream to … Bailout America: How the Government
From the American dream to … bailout America: How the government loosened credit standards and led to the mortgage meltdown Compiled by Edward Pinto, American Enterprise Institute In the early 1990s, Fannie Mae‘s CEO Jim Johnson developed a plan to protect Fannie‘s lucrative charter privileges bestowed by Congress. Ply Congress with copious amounts of affordable housing and Fannie‘s privileges would be secure. It required ―transforming the housing finance system‖ by drastically loosening of loan underwriting standards. Fannie garnered support from community advocacy groups like ACORN and members of Congress. In 1995 President Clinton formalized Fannie‘s plan into the National Homeownership Strategy. President Clinton stated it ―will not cost the taxpayers one extra cent.‖ From 1992 onward, ―skin in the game‖ was progressively eliminated from housing finance. And it worked – Fannie‘s supporters in and outside Congress successfully protected Fannie‘s (and Freddie‘s) charter privileges against all comers – until the American Dream became Bailout America. TIMELINE Credit loosening Warning 1991 HUD Commission complains ―Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac‘s underwriting standards are oriented towards ‗plain vanilla‘ mortgage‖ [Read More] 1991 Lenders will respond to the most conservative standards unless [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] are aggressive and convincing in their efforts to expand historically narrow underwriting [Read More] 1992 Countrywide and Fannie Mae join forces to originate ―flexibly underwritten loans‖ [Read More] 1992 Congress passes
[Show full text]
Housing Finance Reform: Addressing a Growing Divide
08 Housing finance reform: Addressing a growing divide Barclays examines how United States housing finance policies affect homeownership rates, finding that affordability targets can provide an effective counterbalance to rising income inequality. 2 Foreword More than a decade after the mortgage-focused government- sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed under conservatorship during the 2008 Financial Crisis, the debate about the appropriate role of the government in the housing market continues. 13 October 2020 Despite a raft of housing policies including subsidies, taxes We draw several lessons from these results. First, the and mortgage guarantees, the US has similar homeownership government can positively influence housing outcomes. levels to other developed countries that do not offer such Second, the distinct effect of the GSE affordability targets support. Critics of the current policies cite this as evidence suggests that other forms of support, such as the FHA, may that government intervention accomplishes little except create not be sufficient for low income and minority borrowers in distortions in the housing market, and argue for a sharply their current form. reduced role for government going forward. From a housing policy perspective, this does not translate Yet an important structural difference between the US and into support for the status quo. Many interventions in the other developed economies is the high, and rising, level housing market should be reviewed and may be unnecessary, of income inequality in the US. Our analysis indicates that and we cannot ignore the lessons from the financial crisis rising inequality exerts significant downwards pressure and resulting bailouts.
[Show full text]
Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Philippine Policy Responses Global Financial Crisis
Financial Crisis of 2008 and the Philippine Policy Responses Global Financial Crisis March 2008- Bear SfStearns fails July 2008 - Wall Street plunges FDIC bails out large US banks (IndyMac, Washington Mutual, Wachovia) Global Financial Crisis Sept 2008 - Lehman Brothers fails US government bails out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG Global Financial Crisis Oct 2008 - Bailout of UK banks (Royal Bank of Scotland, HBOS and Lloyds TSB) Nov to Dec 2008 - Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Sweden,Italy, Britain, Eurozone, Japan, Hongkong and the US in recession Policy Responses to Global Crisis 1. Central Bank (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Reclassification of Financial Assets from Held for Trading or Available for Sale to the Held-to- Maturity (HTM) or Liquidated Debt Securities classified as Loans categories. - Effective July 1. PliPolicy R esponses t o Gl GlblCiiobal Crisis Price of ROPs* from June ’08 to June ‘09 * Republic of the Philippines PliPolicy R esponses t o Gl GlblCiiobal Crisis Price of ROPs* from June ’08 to June ‘09 * Republic of the Philippines Policy Responses to Global Crisis • Amendment of PDIC Charter Oct 2008 - Bills filed in House of representatives to Dec 2008 and Senate to increase the Maximum Deposit Insurance Coverage (MDIC) Policy Responses to Global Crisis March 4, 2009 - Congress approved joint version of PDIC Charter amendments April 29, 2009 - Signed into law by the President of the Philippines June 1, 2009 - Charter Amendments took effect Policy Responses to Global Crisis Amendments to the PDIC Charter . Increase in the Maximum Deposit Insurance Coverage (MDIC) from P250,000 to P500,000 . Institutional Strengthening Measures 1.
[Show full text]
Systemic Risk Through Securitization: the Result of Deregulation and Regulatory Failure
Revised Feb. 9, 2009 Systemic Risk Through Securitization: The Result of Deregulation and Regulatory Failure by Patricia A. McCoy, * Andrey D. Pavlov, † and Susan M. Wachter ‡ Abstract This paper argues that private-label securitization without regulation is unsustainable. Without regulation, securitization allowed mortgage industry actors to gain fees and to put off risks. During the housing boom, the ability to pass off risk allowed lenders and securitizers to compete for market share by lowering their lending standards, which activated more borrowing. Lenders who did not join in the easing of lending standards were crowded out of the market. In theory, market controls in the form of risk pricing could have constrained heightened mortgage risk without additional regulation. But in reality, as the mortgages underlying securities became more exposed to growing default risk, investors did not receive higher rates of return. Artificially low risk premia caused the asset price of houses to go up, leading to an asset bubble and creating a breeding ground for market fraud. The consequences of lax lending were covered up and there was no immediate failure to discipline the markets. The market might have corrected this problem if investors had been able to express their negative views by short selling mortgage-backed securities, thereby allowing fundamental market value to be achieved. However, the one instrument that could have been used to short sell mortgage-backed securities – the credit default swap – was also infected with underpricing due to lack of minimum capital requirements and regulation to facilitate transparent pricing. As a result, there was no opportunity for short selling in the private-label securitization market.
[Show full text]
Systemic Moral Hazard Beneath the Financial Crisis
Seton Hall University eRepository @ Seton Hall Law School Student Scholarship Seton Hall Law 5-1-2014 Systemic Moral Hazard Beneath The inF ancial Crisis Xiaoming Duan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship Recommended Citation Duan, Xiaoming, "Systemic Moral Hazard Beneath The inF ancial Crisis" (2014). Law School Student Scholarship. 460. https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship/460 The financial crisis in 2008 is the greatest economic recession since the "Great Depression of the 1930s." The federal government has pumped $700 billion dollars into the financial market to save the biggest banks from collapsing. 1 Five years after the event, stock markets are hitting new highs and well-healed.2 Investors are cheering for the recovery of the United States economy.3 It is important to investigate the root causes of this failure of the capital markets. Many have observed that the sudden collapse of the United States housing market and the increasing number of unqualified subprime mortgages are the main cause of this economic failure. 4 Regulatory responses and reforms were requested right after the crisis occurred, as in previous market upheavals where we asked ourselves how better regulation could have stopped the market catastrophe and prevented the next one. 5 I argue that there is an inherent and systematic moral hazard in our financial systems, where excessive risk-taking has been consistently allowed and even to some extent incentivized. Until these moral hazards are eradicated or cured, our financial system will always face the risk of another financial crisis. 6 In this essay, I will discuss two systematic moral hazards, namely the incentive to take excessive risk and the incentive to underestimate risk.
[Show full text]
Sharp -V- Blank (HBOS) Judgment
Neutral Citation Number: [2019] EWHC 3078 (Ch) Case Nos: HC-2014-000292 HC-2014-001010 HC-2014-001387 HC-2014-001388 HC-2014-001389 HC-2015-000103 HC-2015-000105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 15/11/2019 Before: SIR ALASTAIR NORRIS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between: JOHN MICHAEL SHARP Claimants And the other Claimants listed in the GLO Register - and - (1) SIR MAURICE VICTOR BLANK Defendant (2) JOHN ERIC DANIELS (3) TIMOTHY TOOKEY (4) HELEN WEIR (5) GEORGE TRUETT TATE (6) LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Richard Hill QC, Sebastian Isaac, Jack Rivett and Lara Hassell-Hart (instructed by Harcus Sinclair UK Limited) for the Claimants Helen Davies QC, Tony Singla and Kyle Lawson (instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills LLP) for the Defendants Hearing dates: 17-20, 23-27, 30-31 October 2017; 1-2, 6-9, 13-17,20, 22-23, 27, 29-30 November 2017, 1, 11-15, 18-21 December 2017, 12, 16-19, 22-26, 29-31 January 2018, 1-2, 5- 6, 8, 28 February 2018, 1-2 and 5 March 2018 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment I direct that pursuant to CPR PD 39A para 6.1 no official shorthand note shall be taken of this Judgment and that copies of this version as handed down may be treated as authentic. ............................. INDEX: The task in hand 1 The landscape in broad strokes 8 The claim in outline. 29 The legal basis for the claim 41 The factual witnesses. 43 The expert witnesses 59 The facts: the emerging financial
[Show full text]
Systemic Risk in Global Banking: What Can Available
BIS Working Papers No 376 Systemic Risks in Global Banking: What Can Available Data Tell Us and What More Data Are Needed? by Eugenio Cerutti, Stijn Claessens and Patrick McGuire Monetary and Economic Department April 2012 JEL classification: F21, F34, G15, G18, Y1 Keywords: Systemic risks, banking system, international, contagion, vulnerabilities BIS Working Papers are written by members of the Monetary and Economic Department of the Bank for International Settlements, and from time to time by other economists, and are published by the Bank. The papers are on subjects of topical interest and are technical in character. The views expressed in them are those of their authors and not necessarily the views of the BIS. This publication is available on the BIS website (www.bis.org). © Bank for International Settlements 2012. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISSN 1020-0959 (print) ISSN 1682-7678 (online) Systemic Risks in Global Banking: What Can Available Data Tell Us and What More Data Are Needed? Eugenio Cerutti, Stijn Claessens and Patrick McGuire1 Abstract The recent financial crisis has shown how interconnected the financial world has become. Shocks in one location or asset class can have a sizable impact on the stability of institutions and markets around the world. But systemic risk analysis is severely hampered by the lack of consistent data that capture the international dimensions of finance. While currently available data can be used more effectively, supervisors and other agencies need more and better data to construct even rudimentary measures of risks in the international financial system.
[Show full text]
A Framework for Assessing the Systemic Risk of Major Financial Institutions
Finance and Economics Discussion Series Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Affairs Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D.C. A Framework for Assessing the Systemic Risk of Major Financial Institutions Xin Huang, Hao Zhou, and Haibin Zhu 2009-37 NOTE: Staff working papers in the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (FEDS) are preliminary materials circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. The analysis and conclusions set forth are those of the authors and do not indicate concurrence by other members of the research staff or the Board of Governors. References in publications to the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (other than acknowledgement) should be cleared with the author(s) to protect the tentative character of these papers. A framework for assessing the systemic risk of major financial insti- tutions† a, b c Xin Huang ∗, Hao Zhou and Haibin Zhu aDepartment of Economics, University of Oklahoma bRisk Analysis Section, Federal Reserve Board cBank for International Settlements This version: May 2009 Abstract In this paper we propose a framework for measuring and stress testing the systemic risk of a group of major financial institutions. The systemic risk is measured by the price of insur- ance against financial distress, which is based on ex ante measures of default probabilities of individual banks and forecasted asset return correlations. Importantly, using realized correla- tions estimated from high-frequency equity return data can significantly improve the accuracy of forecasted correlations. Our stress testing methodology, using an integrated micro-macro model, takes into account dynamic linkages between the health of major US banks and macro- financial conditions. Our results suggest that the theoretical insurance premium that would be charged to protect against losses that equal or exceed 15% of total liabilities of 12 major US financial firms stood at $110 billion in March 2008 and had a projected upper bound of $250 billion in July 2008.
[Show full text]
KPMG's European Central Bank Quarterly Update
KPMG’s European Central Bank Quarterly Update September 2016 Welcome back from Summer holidays. With rest and SREP 2016 vs. SREP 2015 – how will they relaxation behind us now, KPMG's ECB Office looks forward to refocusing on the SSM priorities and key compare? regulatory issues facing banks across the Eurozone. Hot 4 November will mark the second anniversary of the off the press, the ECB has published its Draft Guidance to European Central Bank (ECB) as banking supervisor. This Banks on Non-Performing Loans. One interesting point is second year of supervision will end with a communication that all banks (even those with low NPLs) will be expected to the significant banks regarding the capital decision on to apply several chapters of the guidance, so it will have a the SSM common Supervisory Review and Evaluation widespread impact. The ECB will invite comment on the Process (SREP) methodology for the ongoing assessment Guidance in the coming months before the guidance goes of credit institutions’ risks, governance arrangements and into effect. KPMG’s ECB Office will soon publish an alert capital and liquidity situation, which have been carefully on this and the combined impact of this Guidance and the tailored to the Eurozone banks’ situations. The question on EBA report on NPLs. the mind of many in the banking sector is, “Is SREP 2016 going to be comparable to SREP 2015?” At the end of July the European Banking Authority released the results of the Stress Test 2016, which have revealed that the banking sector is more resilient than in 2014, but this is offset by high credit risk, poor profitability and other factors.
[Show full text]
100 F Sti·Eet NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Via Email to [email protected]
The Shareholder Commons PO Box 7545 Wilmington, DE 19803-545 Frederick H. Alexander June 14, 2021 Vanessa A. Countiyman Secretaiy Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Sti·eet NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Via email to [email protected] RE: Response to request for public input on climate-related disclosure Dear Ms. Countlyman: The Shareholder Commons is a non-profit organization that seeks to shift the paradigm of investing away from its sole focus on individual company value and towards a systems-first approach to investing that better serves investors and their beneficia1ies. In pa1ticular, we act as a voice for long-te1m, diversified shareholders. Together with the undersigned, we ask that you consider the following critical factors in addressing climate-related disclosure. Effective stewardship requires inside-out information The global economy relies on numerous environmental and social common-pool resources goods that companies can access for free but are depleted when ovemsed. Carbon sinks- vegetative and oceanic systems that absorb more cai·bon than they emit- are ai1 example of such a resource, in that they help to prevent the most catastrophic impacts of climate change but ai·e threatened by deforestation, euti·ophication, and other impacts of commercial activity. Another example is public health, which constitutes a common social resource because a healthy population provides labor productivity and innovation and limits healthcai·e costs but is subject to depletion by companies that emit carcinogens or sell products that lead to obesity and other health hazards. Individual companies fmai1cially benefit by externalizing costs and depleting such common goods when the return to the business from that free (to it) consumption outweighs any diluted cost it might shai·e as a paiticipai1t in the economy.
[Show full text]
Value-At-Risk Under Systematic Risks: a Simulation Approach
International Research Journal of Finance and Economics ISSN 1450-2887 Issue 162 July, 2017 http://www.internationalresearchjournaloffinanceandeconomics.com Value-at-Risk Under Systematic Risks: A Simulation Approach Arthur L. Dryver Graduate School of Business Administration National Institute of Development Administration, Thailand E-mail: [email protected] Quan N. Tran Graduate School of Business Administration National Institute of Development Administration, Thailand Vesarach Aumeboonsuke International College National Institute of Development Administration, Thailand Abstract Daily Value-at-Risk (VaR) is frequently reported by banks and financial institutions as a result of regulatory requirements, competitive pressures, and risk management standards. However, recent events of economic crises, such as the US subprime mortgage crisis, the European Debt Crisis, and the downfall of the China Stock Market, haveprovided strong evidence that bad days come in streaks and also that the reported daily VaR may be misleading in order to prevent losses. This paper compares VaR measures of an S&P 500 index portfolio under systematic risks to ones under normal market conditions using a historical simulation method. Analysis indicates that the reported VaR under normal conditions seriously masks and understates the true losses of the portfolio when systematic risks are present. For highly leveraged positions, this means only one VaR hit during a single day or a single week can wipe the firms out of business. Keywords: Value-at-Risks, Simulation methods, Systematic Risks, Market Risks JEL Classification: D81, G32 1. Introduction Definition Value at risk (VaR) is a common statistical technique that is used to measure the dollar amount of the potential downside in value of a risky asset or a portfolio from adverse market moves given a specific time frame and a specific confident interval (Jorion, 2007).
[Show full text]
Fixed Income
FX Market Headlines EUR rallies as bailout agreed Greece finally secures second bailout JPY weakens on inflation target BoE minutes indicate that more QE could be on the way EURCHF closes in on 1.20 floor Important Disclosure This document is based on information provided by Citigroup Investment Research, Citigroup Global Markets, Citigroup Global Citi analystsalth Management and Citigroup Alternative Investments. It is provided for your information only. It is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Information in this document has been prepared without taking account of the objectives, financial situation or needs of any particular investor. Accordingly, investors should, before acting on the information, consider its appropriateness, having regard to their objectives, financial situation and needs. Any decision to purchase securities mentioned herein should be made based on a review of your particular circumstances with your financial adviser. Investments referred to in this document are not recommendations of Citibank or its affiliates. Although information has been obtained from and is based upon sources that Citibank believes tobe reliable, we do not guarantee its accuracy and it may be incomplete and condensed. All opinions, projections and estimates constitute the judgment of the author as of the date of publication and are subject to ch ange without notice. Prices and availability of financial instruments also are subject to change without notice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The document is not to be construed as a solicitation or recommendation of investment advice. Subject to the nature and contents of the document, the investments described herein are subject to fluctuations in price and/or value and investors may get back less than originally invested.
[Show full text]